Woman who claims to be a Christian denounces premarital chastity

Here’s the plan for this post. We’re going to take a look at a post by a woman who claims to be a Christian. In that post, she offers some reasons why premarital chastity is wrong. Then we’ll take a look at what the Bible says. Then we’ll take a look at what the research says. Then I explain what this trend among Christian women means for marriage-minded men.

First here is the post by “Joy”. Her reasons for disagreeing with premarital chastity are as follows:

Chastity makes women who have had premarital sex feel ashamed

It does no harm for a woman to have premarital sex before marriage

God made people with a sexual drive, so God thinks that premarital sex is OK

Most people are already having sex, so God thinks that premarital sex is OK

Practicing sex with men you don’t intend to marry makes you better at marital sex

In another post, she is more clear about her views: (these are her actual words)

Choosing to not to abstain from sexual intercourse before marriage is not shameful.

Your decision to abstain or not to abstain does not necessarily have any connection to the health of your future marriage.

Your decision to abstain or not to abstain does not necessarily have any connection to the health of your future sex life.

Now first off, she has no Biblical evidence for any of these assertions in the original post I linked to. She also has no evidence from outside the Bible for any of her assertions. Assertion #3 in the list of 5 above seems to me to justify adultery as easily as it justifies premarital sex. Now, you might expect a person who claims to be a Christian to look first to the Bible to see what is right and wrong, then to look to evidence to strengthen the argument when discussing it with others inside and outside the church. For Joy, feelings and peer-pressure are enough to make anything morally OK. Now let’s take a quick look at what the Bible says about chastity and premarital sex:

1 Cor. 7:8-9

8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to stay single as I am.

9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

The idea of “burning” here has to do with sexual desire. Here Paul tells all unmarried people that if they cannot control their sexual desires, they need to get married. Why? Because Paul assumes that one cannot fulfill this sexual desire outside of the marital bed. While Paul would love for them to remain single (1 Cor. 7:7), he believes that sex outside of marriage is a destructive sin and cannot be used as a gratifying release of our sexual passions.

Now what evidence outside the Bible is there to support that? Here’s some:

Now back to Joy, What I have found when dealing with women like Joy in the church is that the Bible has no authority over them. Not even the words of Jesus have authority to lead them. And obviously they are not impressed with evidence from science, history, etc. Their sole reason for acting the way they do is their own feelings. Whatever they do that seems right to them cannot be questioned or judged. If things don’t “work out”, then they are a helpless victim. God’s will for them is that they do whatever they feel like in order to be happy.

It’s very very important for men who are seeking marriage to understand that the typical woman they meet in the church does not understand that Christianity imposes any obligations on them. They don’t look at the Bible for moral guidance, but for comfort. And they don’t study outside the Bible to become persuaded (and persuasive) about what the Bible teaches. Their view of Christianity is that they are good where they are, and that there is nothing that they should be studying or planning for in order to achieve goals, like evangelism or marriage. Everything has to be easy and feel good.

Fortunately, there is a way to detect the women who are serious about Christianity, and it can be done by simply asking them questions to see if they have moved beyond the feelings/selfishness model of Christianity to the truth/ responsibility model of Christianity. All you have to do is ask them questions to see how much effort they’ve put into confirming what the Bible teaches by reading outside the Bible. Christians read the Bible to know what’s true, and they read outside the Bible to convince themselves to act on what they know is true, and to show to others what’s true in a persuasive way. But reading outside the Bible is at war with the feelings /victim/ don’t-judge-me view of Christianity pushed by people like Joy. That is because the more you read, the less room there is for doing what you feel like. When you study, what you learn constrains your actions.

I think men should avoid women who respond to the claims of Scripture and the evidence from research by sticking their fingers in their ears and saying “don’t judge me! don’t shame me!”. You can’t make a marriage with someone who is dismissive of moral obligations, and who acknowledges no higher authority than her own feelings and the approval of her secular, progressive peers. The Bible forbids “unequal yoking”, which is the marriage of a Christian to a non-Christian.

More about Joy and the women of A Deeper Story

A little more digging reveals that they are pro-gay marriage and claim that it is compatible with Christianity:

Joy Bennett – The Supreme Court’s ruling today to overturn DOMA is the right decision, and one that I welcome. It refers the definition of marriage and recognition of same-sex marriage back to states. It surprises me to hear conservatives, who ardently support states’ rights, bemoaning this ruling as “sin winning.” It is my personal position that any couple wishing to vow fidelity and faithfulness to one another ought to be encouraged in that endeavor. And any couple willing to make that kind of commitment and form a family ought to receive the civil and legal rights that naturally follow the formation of a family. I see the legal recognition of a marriage as a completely separate issue from the theological discussion of homosexuality. The Supreme Court did not change anything about so-called traditional marriage. The Supreme Court did not require churches or religious bodies to recognize same-sex marriage. It made a civil ruling. The theological question of whether homosexuality is a sin is completely separate from its legality, and it would behoove today’s American Christians to remember that fact.

They are pro-premarital sex and claim that it is compatible with Christianity (in the post I linked to).

The two articles she linked to bashing the “purity culture” (chastity) contain no Bible verses, and no studies. No truth at all, really. Note that bashing chastity is compatible with their feminist egalitarian convictions.

One of the authors she linked to (Sarah Bessey) has a book that is endorsed by Rachel Held Evans and Brian MacLaren. That’s where these guys are coming from ideologically. They are bashing Biblical morality and judging anyone who dares to say that anything is morally wrong. They feel that that people should never be made to feel bad by what the Bible says. (And what studies confirm).

So these people are not Christian in any meaningful way, but more like Trojan horses, manufacturing “diversity” of opinions where there is none, IF you take the Bible seriously as a rule on moral issues. If you’re a man looking to marry, you need to be able to detect women like this – don’t just assume they are good Christian women because they go to church. Ask questions.

56 thoughts on “Woman who claims to be a Christian denounces premarital chastity”

I’m sorry, but this practice by these is really common, so I had to blog about it. I posted this one back to back with the gay Christian debate to everyone who sexual behavior is causing people to determine their theology, which is what apologetics helps you solve. With apologetics, truth drives everything. I think if we spoon-feed kids Christianity like it’s our custom, they will redefine it – we have to show them how we came to these conclusions and open it all up for exploration and debate.

How do you explain the high percentage of pre martial sex in the church? 86 % of young evangelicals are no longer virgins, and one sermon by John MacArthur claims that even in his church, 76% are not virgins by the time they come into pre marital counseling.

I blame it on pastors preaching entirely from the Bible, and not making any effort to 1) draw on scientific research that shows the effects of premarital sex on marital quality and stability and 2) they have no vision and no practical plan for making their marriage achieve anything, other than as a vehicle for their own happiness. I am constantly, constantly being told by single women that they don’t want the burden of raising INFLUENTIAL children with any serious plan. They want things to be free and loose, with the goal of making the marriage make them happy. So OF COURSE they are not interested in best practices. They are not interested in sacrifice and what works to get results.

I suspect it’s largely because most of those in the church don’t approach dating any differently from the rest of society. If you just try to draw a line in the sand somewhere between kissing and having sex, but don’t take practical steps to avoid vulnerable situations (say, time alone together in a house/apartment/dorm), there’s a very good chance you’re going to end up letting your passions get the best of you.

What kind of question is that? “How do you explain…?” They’re morally lazy people who attend church and CALL themselves Christians.

However, within those percentages there ARE good Christians. And you didn’t even suspect that. How? Because they gave themselves to Christ AFTER their sins. (They don’t become virgins again, you know!)

The fact that you couldn’t see that; that you deliberately chose NOT to see that shows exactly what you are.

I do not believe in premarital sex, nor do I believe there is a biblical argument to be made for forgetting all about chastity.

However, the secret to what drives women is contained in that first sentence where she says, “chastity makes women who have had premarital sex feel ashamed” It’s the constant shaming, condemnation, and judgment always dished out to women, that motivates us to loose our fricken minds. If we’re to be shamed over chastity, well so much for chastity. If we’re to be shamed over divorce, well so much for marriage entirely. If we’re to be shamed away from Christ Himself, well, so much for Christ then.

Look at the backlash in the world right now, that springs from women being constantly and inappropriately shamed over our own sexuality.

Shame is something that came from the garden of Eden and God didn’t put it there. Adam and Eve are naked in the garden and they feel no shame. The moment they sin, they feel shame and try to cover themselves with fig leaves. God provides covering for their shame with skins.

Shame is a nasty bugger, it’s not a tool Christ ever uses against any of the women He encounters in the bible and there’s a reason for that. It’s not an effective way of reaching us because we can spot the hypocrisy behind it.

I think there is ‘positive’ and negative shame. The negative sort ridicules and exposes a person to public humiliation for not living up to some standard commonly held – it is destructive and rightly drives people to repudiate the standard and hypocracy of the judgements. Positive shame tho is a part of love because the one who loves views the other as glorious and praiseworthy and honest people know we are often neither glorious or praiseworthy in our actions and desires. A sense of shame is connected to love but is aimed at betterment and ultimaly recongnizes the fact that persons were made for more than they currently are; that we are not where (or who) we should be in the eyes of love, which causes shame but of a ‘positive’ sort because it drives a person to try and live as better persons (the way love thinks of you) or at lest it should…

The problem with shame is that it’s always attached to pride. The more shame people have dumped on them they more they tend to wall themselves off with pride.

This becomes especially insidious between men and women because women can spot hypocrisy a mile away, and when that happens we lose our respect for men.

This is very true, “What I have found when dealing with women like Joy in the church is that the Bible has no authority over them.” If fact, nothing has any authority over them anymore. They’ve hardened their hearts. Usually one hardens their heart when they have seen too much hypocrisy and no loner trust the integrity of those claiming authority.

Exactly (Nathancline), positive shame doesn’t stay and continue condemning like “negative” shame would. Positive shame is good because it allows us to realize we need to change, or that we violated some kind of moral code. Good shame is when you feel ashamed of attacking someone without self control, cheating on your spouse, doing something against your own integrity, lying, stealing, sexually immoral – having sex outside of marriage… it is all there for a reason. Negative shame is ungodly and crosses into the judgmental and unloving actions of people. God judges, but He judges justly and He IS love… you cannot separate God from being Love, even the Greek word used in the NT for “wrath” of God has a deeper meaning that is paired with sorrow and heart-wrenching grief. So even when God is punishing evil people justly, it is not in a rage-like out-of-control kind of way, it is with control, and with deep sorrow and grief (coming from His love even for evil people).

I’m not really sure that the deterioration of sexual mores has to do with too much slut-shaming. If anything, there’s not enough of the right kind of shame. People are much more permissive about pre/extra-marital sex, yet the hookup culture is stronger, the rates of illegitimacy are up, and divorce is more prevalent than any time in recent history.

You seem to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater by lumping in people that advocate to Biblical morality and healthy societal norms, with the pharisaical people who enjoy looking down their noses at others. And while we are not to place stumbling blocks in front of our brothers and sisters in Christ, it doesn’t negate the importance of church discipline – far from it: it works with it perfectly.

And having a stumbling block placed in front of you is no excuse for sin, no matter how much you feel like it makes you lose your mind. Just the same: a man who has been wrongfully divorced and chastised by churchians for not being the modern model husband is still responsible if he allows his bitterness to lead him to sexual immorality.

I was going to respond to your comment about Jesus not using shaming by saying that he shamed the Pharisees and that God shames the strong and the wise in scripture. But you specifically say women. I suppose there wasn’t an incident of Jesus shaming a woman (aside from the gentile woman he called a dog), but one was shown to be deeply repentant, and another was told to “sin no more.”

I’m speaking to cause and effect here. Why would Joy suddenly decide to reject chastity and promote such an idea? Well she tells us, women who have had premarital sex are being made to feel ashamed. So who is running around dumping shame on women and is that proving to be an effective tactic for bringing them back in line with biblical values? From observing the world around me, I’d have to say, no, things are getting much worse.

“You seem to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater by lumping in people that advocate to Biblical morality and healthy societal norms, with the pharisaical people who enjoy looking down their noses at others.”

Possibly, but it’s nearly impossible to tell the difference these days.

I was working on a somewhat lengthy reply, but when I re-read how you admit to throwing out loving rebuke with haughty judgement because you can’t tell (and seemingly imply no having interest in) the difference, I decided to scrap it and start over.

I would suggest reading and praying over Proverbs as it mentions the folly of rejecting corrections, as well as the pride you brought up in another reply, a number of times.

I’ve seen what sins have done to friends, family, and myself; and I would rather that most people learn to avoid these mistakes. I thank God that he put me through the ringer in a few ways to humble me (although I have a ways to go still), and to realize how wrong I was to respond with anger and pride when I was corrected when I was younger. I also realize that the choices I’ve made because of that stubborn grip I had on modern values has probably led me to the point of never having a wife and family of my own.

One thing from my original post: When you lay the blame for the the wrongdoing of women at the feet of men, you are essentially removing the amount of agency women have as humans. So long as God has not allowed their heart to be hardened, women (and men) are able to recognize their sin like the woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears and her hair. She sought him out knowing she was full of sin. She humbled herself completely, and not after being kindly suggested by Christs’ disciples, but possibly after years of abject hatred and scorn from those around her.

I’m actually a bit angry about the shaming behavior of several Christian men on the internet right now, who seem to believe that representing Christ means endlessly obsessing over the alleged sins of women while never even attempting to pull the log out of their own eye.

The fastest way to completely revoke all moral authority in women’s eyes is to be rampantly wallowing in sin while attempting to point fingers at women as if we are to blame for all that is wrong in the world.

This quickly becomes nothing but blatant hypocrisy and you leave me without a leg to stand on while trying to speak to people like Joy.

Nobody has full agency, ever. Women respond to their leadership and to the circumstances around them and it begins to influence their behavior. It is not particularly fair that decent men have to suffer for the poor behavior of their Christian brothers, but it is what it is.

I agree with Kilrud. I think this article is a pretty clear example of women who are claiming to be Christians who outright twist the Bible to say somethign it doesn’t say in order to avoid feeling ashamed. Everyone has to decide whether they are the source of morality “premarital sex isn’t wrong”, or whether God is “premarital sex is wrong”. Something wrong doesn’t become right because there are fingers pointed at you. That’s a very common tactic that some people use to get out of being judged, but in the end there is a final judgement and there will be no shaming of that judge by asking him to pull the log out of HIS eye.By that logic, the man who commits adultery could just blame his wife for making him feel ashamed of what he did.

Everyone sins. Even though I am a virgin in my late 30s, I sin in other ways. But you don’t see me trying to twist Christianity to justify my sin. I’m sorry when I sin, and I would never tell people not to judge me. I think some people who put emotions above the moral teachings of the Bible will want to avoid feeling bad when they break the rules, but Christianity is a religion where we are urged not to sin. It’s a serious problem for someone to claim to be a Christian then seek to redefine right and wrong based on a felt dislike of being judged.

Although I don’t stop people from judging me, I do think that I am more willing to listen to judgments from people who are really trying to set boundaries for my own good. And if they explain how the rule I am breaking is wrong, using the Bible and other evidence, that usually works on me.

I don’t think you get what Wintry Knight’s point was. He was saying the the same tactic that you are using in overlooking or excusing sin by deflecting to the wrongdoing of others can be done by men, and that it’s wrong when done by either sex. Christians of the manosphere know that a man who becomes a cad after being wrongfully divorced and saddled with egregious alimony and child support requirements is still wrong for being a cad, no matter the sins of his wife. Similarly, a man who commits adultery is guilty even is his wife threw a stumbling block onto his path by acting counter to 1 Corinthians 7:5. And if that man were to try and twist scripture to suit his desires, most of us would call him out for it. In fact, Cane Caldo has done this on his blog on more than one occasion. Dalrock also notes such actions as being immoral, but doesn’t make a fuss over it when referring to non-Christian men. The point of many Christian men’s blogs is not to shame as much as it is to expose female sinful proclivities that are given a pass even by many churches in our modern feminized societies, and a key factor in the destruction in the family. You may disagree that that’s an issue, but that’s the reason for their focus. All sin is sin, but the most dangerous ones are the ones that are rationalized as acceptable or even not recognized as sin.

In any case I never said that humans have full agency. I chose my words carefully specifically because of Romans 9:18. I was just referring to the agency that God has allowed us, and we have no reason to believe that men have more than women, despite our complimentary roles. Moreover, I am concerned about hardened hearts, as I am afraid you may be on that way, sister. I say this not as condemnation, and I pray I’m mistaken, but with genuine agape. All I know of you is through the comments here, but from those I see a pattern of claiming to agree, and then doing an about face to say what boils down to “but men…” to not only conceal sin, but to enable Joy’s blasphemy. Someone else may be able to suggest more pertinent scripture, but I would still like to suggest Proverbs. As there are 31 chapters, it’s great for reading one a day and completing it in a month.

Our culture has a knee-jerk reaction to shame. The hedonistic culture we live in hates shame because we don’t like to feel bad for our sin.

The truth is, shame is a good thing. It’s like physical pain in that it’s a warning sign that something is wrong. People without pain receptors often injure themselves and may even kill themselves without realizing they’re causing damage. Shame is similar. Feeling shame is a warning sign that we have done wrong and that we need forgiveness from God. It’s the normal, proper response to committing sin that God programmed into us. We’re supposed to feel shame when we sin so that we realize our need for a Savior. People with a blunted sense of shame, like people without pain receptors, may continue to damage themselves (spiritually) without realizing it and without seeking the forgiveness and healing they need.

Of course, people can feel false shame where they feel guilty for something that wasn’t wrong. And people can hypocritically point out the shame of others while ignoring their own guilt. Both of those are bad. But shame, in itself, isn’t a bad thing. It’s meant to turn us to God.

Of course, many people in our culture would rather remove the bad feelings of shame than to address the underlying issue by admitting their guilt and their need for a Savior. A culture, like ours, that is focused on abolishing shame is a culture of people who are desperately trying to ignore their own sinfulness and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

I totally agree with that. It just appears as if so many people seem to think the cure for shame is to just dump more shame on people.

Women are actually relentlessly shamed for chastity itself. They’re shamed for modesty, for having Christian values, for not following the ways of the world. Then if they ever fall short, the church likes to jump in and shame them some more for failing. The end result is that women simply break, go off the deep end, and start rewriting scripture as Joy has tried to do. It’s not that the scripture was wrong, it’s that human beings have caused so much wounding, that people have shut themselves off from shame entirely.

Shaming women for chastity and modesty is false shame. Those are not things to be ashamed of. We should expect the world to mock and deride us for making a stand for right. We have to learn how to handle that. We have to stand, unashamed, for what’s right and have the courage and strength to do so. We should totally expect to have a lot of people against us. That’s just normal for a Christian living in a fallen world. Scripture tells us to expect it.

In fact, we should expect much worse. We actually have it pretty good around here. Christians in other countries get killed, raped, tortured, and their families are harmed too – just for being Christian. We’re too weak and cowardly if we think having the world say bad things about us is something terrible we can’t handle. If we can’t handle mere words, how could we hope to stand for God in the face of real persecution? I’m not saying it’s easy, but we should count it joy to receive a little derision from the world for being a Christian. The apostles counted it joy to rot in prison and to die for Christ. Christians around the world rejoice in suffering real harm for the name of Christ. Surely we can handle the world thinking we’re a little crazy. One has to wonder if people who fall away in response to a little disagreement and name-calling from the world were ever really committed to Christ in the first place.

This woman, like many today in our post-shame culture, has a serious problem with the concept of shame. She does not want to feel shame in any sense of the word. But, she should. Just as I should, and any Christian who reads their Bible for all it’s worth should. I feel a certain degree of shame every time I open up the Good Book – which is why I approach it in fear and trembling. Without some element of regret or shame, how on earth does sanctification take place?!?

You can be sure that if she were called out on her apostasy, she would quote Matthew 7:1 and then label the individual calling her out a Pharisee. Yet, notice what she says here when it comes to SSM: “The theological question of whether homosexuality is a sin is completely separate from its legality, and it would behoove today’s American Christians to remember that fact.” She seems to be calling out Christians who interpret theology (and law) differently than she does. Why, she is judging us! (gasp!) For this reason, she is the self-refuting hypocrite (yes, the biggest Pharisee of all!) that her “you shouldn’t judge” philosophy demands.

The reason that this mindset has infected the Church, IMO, is because the Church tends to teach the cheap grace “gospel” and not the difficult Christian orthopraxy that accompanies the true Gospel and which has been emphasized for 2000 years. Isn’t it strange that for nearly two millennia years, pastors and preachers and theologians and aunts and mothers and grandmothers and Godly women of all ages, but especially women of a certain age, never had the slightest reservation of saying “Shame on you!” but in the last few decades, this expression has disappeared with the cultural wind?

Basically, according to her logic, premarital sex isn’t wrong because they don’t like the shaming done against fornicators. You know what that means? That means that people who waited and are waiting (I being one) are being shamed for trying to honor God.

The secular people hate virginity, and they mock virginity. She has basically just joined the crowd. One of her reasons against virginity until marriage is because virgins will still struggle with sex before marriage, so they should practice before marriage. Basically, she is with the secular and is saying that virgins are bad sex partners and marriage is about great sex partners. Without it, one can’t survive. She is all the way with the secular. Judging by the amount of comments and traffic her articles get, there are many people like her, supposed Christians who mock virgins and poke fun of people like me. People then wonder why there are so many single guys? Look at articles like this! I would never date someone like this.

It may be lonely being a virgin waiting for God today, but I will keep waiting if the dating pool is this. If she wasn’t faithful before marriage, and doesn’t prize that in a partner, then no way. She has no concept of God’s purity standard of husband to a bride if she is blase about her purity and mine. We are supposed to be one for life, not one with multiple people. Commitment only. People say that sounds strange coming from a guy. Then again, I guess I’m strange as a male virgin.

Yeah, in this day and age, that’s the problem. Adherence to virginity and Godly standards is such a problem. . It’ is seen as such an evil. Like Isaiah 5, bitter good and good evil. It is touched upon here. I have noticed in one way or another that most girls just assume that by a certain age everybody will have had sex in some way. So when a virgin (especially a male one) comes along, it is so groundbreaking that they can’t understand. Then after misunderstanding, they will conceive him to be some weirdo, freak, dysfunctional, or sexually repressed. Even if one’s on fire for God, they will never date him. The “virgin tag” is on him. Who would want that “weirdo”, right? “He’s probably not even good in bed!” is what they would say.

Although I cannot stand this article, this article does touch on the insecurity that I secretly harbor. I read somewhere that 42% of daters would not date a person once they find he/she is a virgin. In this culture, the fornicator is greater than the celibate virgin. That has to be admitted. Most people would rather date experienced people than inexperienced. I have heard people say it for myself! However, I am Lord’s possession. I don’t want anything else more. I still sin, yes, and I still have desires inside, like dating a beauty. Yet, I know that statistic. It strikes fear for me in ever finding someone who appreciates the gift of virginity. I honestly feel like giving up hope since this is the prevailing opinion of today.

I’m not prideful or boasting in being a virgin, but I feel a little shame & insecurity at the same time over the v-card. I wonder if there truly exist anymore people who would appreciate virgins, particularly male virgins. Who knows, I could be listening to the wrong sources. I just haven’t found anybody speak to the contrary.

Hey, I was looking for a male virgin to marry and I found one. I waited and I wanted a husband who waited too. In fact, I would have considered sexual experience, if not a deal breaker, then at least a red flag. I might have married a man who had sex before becoming a Christian or who messed up once and repented and had been celibate since and had a plan for refraining from sex until marriage. But I certainly wouldn’t have married a man who thought it was just fine to have sex before marriage. A man with the right view of Christian chastity was a non-negotiable for me and someone with the foresight and self-control to ensure he remained a virgin until marriage was something I specifically wanted.

There are plenty of godly girls out there who value chastity and want a husband who hasn’t slept around. They’re harder to find than they used to be, but they’re out there. I suggest looking in small, conservative churches that emphasize godly living and in Christian homeschool groups. These girls tend to value Christian chastity more than your typical church goer.

Thanks for the advice. I appreciate it. And I wasn’t calling or demanding the girl I marry to be a virgin either. I just hope that if she isn’t one, that she is living for Jesus and trying to honor him with her body. I would hope she would only look for a ring before intimacy occurs. Even though it isn’t the ideal perfection, I could date or marry someone who’s not a virgin (I think), as long as she is like has turned away from it all.

It’s hard to find anybody who hasn’t bought into the “test drive” world. It’s like everybody is saying “Why not test drive it before you buy it?” I’ll never go for that. I’d rather stay a virgin for life than do that, even though the world says virginity’s pathetic.

I have heard people say that they wouldn’t marry before having sex, just in case the sex isn’t that good at all. They want to test the skills or something, which is something I’ve never thought about. Now the question is, how do we as Christ followers combat that viewpoint? I don’t know how. Any advice? What happens if you do run into that person?

It can also help to point out to people that the goal isn’t to have great sex immediately on the wedding night. You have your whole marriage to get good at sex. Sex is a learned skill. Some people have more natural talent at it. But anyone can learn to be good in bed with practice.

Sexual ability isn’t a static thing that you’re either good at or not. Sexual ability grows with practice. And it grows best when you practice with the same person for years. The people with the best sex lives are those who have been married to each other for 10+ years, according to surveys.

Since being good at sex is a skill to be learned, everyone has to start out somewhere, with no experience, and get better from there. You can either do that before marriage and have the awkwardness and performance pressure knowing that the other person is evaluating you and may reject you if you aren’t good enough or you can wait for the safety and security of marriage when the other person has already committed to loving and standing by you. You can either bare yourself and have your first encounter with a near stranger or with someone who loves you and is committed to you.

Also, sex being “good” isn’t just about the physical sensations. Someone with experience might be better at providing the right sensations, but sex is more than just pleasant feelings. Sex at its best is a physical AND emotional AND spiritual experience. It bonds two people together comprehensively. For sex to reach that kind of total bonding experience, there has to be commitment and self-sacrifice – which is not what you find in premarital sex. People who practice sex before marriage teach themselves to value the right physical sensations, but miss out on the full experience that sex is supposed to be. They seek sex selfishly, focused on making themselves feel good. That has lasting implications in marriage that may even prevent them from finding the true intimacy they long for.

I have to say, to see this kind of sexual immorality infecting the church is incredibly sad. As a guy who loves what the Bible teaches about chastity before marriage and celebrates it every day, it is particularly sad for me to hear this coming from a woman. I want to meet a woman who believes in and has practiced chastity before marriage so badly that sometimes I just get plain depressed. So many women these days, even in the church, just have no discretion whatsoever and give their bodies away at such early ages and in such regrettable ways. When I read what Tyler Stevenson said, about girls not dating him because they know he is a virgin, (and it seems like he is talking about girls in the church!), this just grieved me to no end. Honestly, I read some comments about looking for godly young women in home school groups and conservative churches, but does anyone know of any other ways to find people who actually uphold biblical norms on sex? Any dating websites? Seriously, sometimes I just have no hope….

I am an old guy, Jesse, so this may be off-target. But, I would think that at least some, if not many, of the women who are very active in the pro-life cause would be very receptive to the fact that you are pursuing godly manliness. Here I am thinking of those women who are sidewalk counselors or work in crisis pregnancy centers or even in organizing marches and demonstrations – really any deeply committed Christian woman in this field. Bonus: the older married Christian women in this cause will be your ally too!

The reason that I am hypothesizing this is because if a Christian woman is on or near the front lines of the War on the Womb, she MUST at some point realize the extraordinarily ameliorative role that chastity plays in her cause. She must see the devastating positive correlation between greater contraceptive use and more abortions. And, she must, at some level, understand the heavy hypocrisy involved in sleeping around and supporting the pro-life cause.

These women are REALLY smart too! More importantly, they are super wise. You have to be to deal with the darkness of pro-aborts and to provide good philosophical, biological, ethical, and Biblical apologetics when reasoning with the “tolerant” ones. And, despite all of the questionable Millennial Christians like the one in this post, the Millennials are the ones who are going to abolish abortion. These women are tough, and setbacks do not faze them one bit! (Good marriage material.) Hope this helps – God bless you!!!

You’re off-target. I have had two women active in the pro-life cause tell me they would prefer a man with sexual experience so that they don’t have to feel any shame for losing their virginity when they were young. And that’s not the only time I’ve heard that. Male chastity is not praiseworthy, it’s viewed as a threat, because it denies a woman leverage in a fight. She wants to be able to get her way by saying “but you were unchaste, too”. It’s not logical, but that’s how it works.

People do not understand that there is value in chastity in a man – you can see his self-control, and you can see his ability to be faithful, and you can see his ability to court without being overly physical and focus in on assessing and planning for marriage. Once a man has had sex, it plays more highly in his mind when dealing with women. Another reason why chastity matters.

Of course, I blogged before on the studies that show that for every partner a woman has before her husband, there is a large percent decrease in the probability that the marriage will be intact after 10 years.

I agree with everything you are saying here, obviously, but I think that your sample size (2) is too small. :-) That is why I used the phrase “at least some … of the women … in the pro-life cause.” Don’t give up! (You or Jesse.)

My reply to the women who told you something insane like that would be “do you recognize the causal link between higher sexual frequency, male and-or female, and more abortions?”

Every CPC I have been involved with has pushed some form of chastity / abstinence, so my second question(s) would be “How can you push abstinence to poor black women and men, but not to yourself? Is that not unbelievably hypocritical and reminiscent of Margaret Sanger-type thinking?”

Also, I fail to see where my logic is wrong here. I realize I am presenting a theory, but is there any data to support the idea that Christian women in the pro-life cause are “looser” than Christian women as a whole? (That’s a 70’s word – hopefully you get what I mean. :-)) Theory says it would be the opposite – but that’s if they are not acting hypocritically.

On a separate subject, is there anything we can do to get Christian women to actually understand Matthew 7 and to quit falling for the post-modernistic “you shouldn’t judge” nonsense? I am running into this so frequently (I know, I know, my name is WGC, and I am a Pharisee) among even women who should know better. We really are in a bad place when someone says to a typical modern-day Christian woman (or feminist man) “Shame on you” and the next thing you know she is acting like you violated her human rights. Why is it that they don’t take that as the act of love it is intended to be?!?

STR has published “The Judgment on Judging” several times, and I am trying to get this out to people, but it just seems like these women are multiplying like rabbits. Oh yeah, they WOULD be now, wouldn’t they? :-)

Thanks WorldGoneCrazy, for your comment. I never thought about looking specifically in certain ministries like the pro-life movement for godly, chaste women. Maybe that could be a potential option. Though I do agree with Winterknight that there are hypocrites in every setting, even the very best of churches that repudiate sexual immorality. I guess you just have to ask a lot of really good questions to test their faith and see whether or not it is genuine. Still, reading about some of these stories just makes my heart ache. Women in the pro-life movement, professing Christians, saying they prefer a man who has slept around with lots of women because it means he has more experience? What kind of insanity is that? I really hate hearing about these people, because not only are the total hypocrites but they are completely driven by lust instead of pure, holy, and godly agape love. Seriously, if that is the dating pool these days in the church, I would prefer to stay single for life. I can’t imagine being married to someone like that. Judging your performance in bed. Comparing you to other people. Turning something that God intends to be an expression of pure love into a competition. It’s all just very wicked and sinful, and it grieves God’s heart as well as mine. Perhaps things would be better if more churches actually practiced church discipline as Paul prescribes in 1 Corinthians chapter 5, and exclude people from membership who are unrepentant in their sexual sin. It would sure keep the bride of Christ pure, not to mention give guys like me a better shot at finding someone chaste. Ephesians 5:5—we may be sure that no one who is sexually immoral has any inheritance in the kingdom of God and Christ. That simple.

I think the best place to look is female Christian apologists. They have an understanding of faith that has caused them to serve God and be practical about how to do it. And look for the ones who like the good evidential arguments, not silly stuff like the “argument from desire” or the “argument from literature”.

I don’t think there are many, but I would certainly like to have hope that there are some who are like you & I. Personally, it is like virginity is something people hide or something. There have to be some, but I think the world has basically retreated them into silence. Anything Biblical is considered “judgmental”, like this article author describes, which has led people to turn away from things like virginity. Thus, our premarital sex rates in the church are so great, with one of 10 only being virgins until marriage. So I cannot tell you perfectly. However, I say let’s not stop looking. LindsayHarold did give some good places. Let’s keep looking.

I would love it if Christians would actually esteem virginity, but now we can’t even agree on this. Now Christian virgins are in low propriety. We’re just following the world on this one. However, I guess all it takes is finding one girl who’s sincere. And like I said, I’m not demanding her to be a virgin. I’ll take a non-virgin if it was the past & she is a sincere follower of Jesus now & for the future.

Yes, I agree Wintery. I definitely don’t disagree on that end. I’m one like you too. Statistically however, both male virgins and female virgins aren’t as probable to find for both sexes. Even then, people want to hide or keep it secret because of shame and ridicule from the world at large. That makes it even harder to find it. People can be all sorts of things, but a virgin in society is considered shameful. People made fun of Tebow for being a virgin in the NFL, & then there was even a show called the Virgin diaries. The virgins on that show were considered backwards too. I’m saying that we have to combat cultural media to even begin having an effect with this issue. With that vehicle shaping people’s attitudes, even in the church setting, we are the virgin anomaly.

WinteryKnight: I have a few questions. 1)what do you mean by female Christian apologists? Do you mean trained apologists with degrees or just intellectually orientated Christian laywomen? 2) How do you find them? Are there specific places where you have found there to be more intellectual Christian women than other places?

I saw several comments about where to look for Godly Christian women virgins. I have thought about this, and I don’t know if this is something that Christian chaste men will consider, but it popped into my head as a serious suggestion:

Would you date and consider marrying a Christian virgin woman who does not rate highly or even moderate on your personal physical attractiveness scale? Let’s say that she has a wonderful personality, well-read, even engages in evidential Christian apologetics, but her physical looks and body aren’t as attractive has her inner beauty. There might be a number of women like this that the bachelor men might consider as potential wives.

Would you marry a woman that fits this profile, WK?

Another mutiple-choice scenario. Rank the following:

(A) A physically not-attractive Christian virgin woman whose character and personality that you like.

(B) A moderately attractive Christian woman who’s not a virgin, but she’s ashamed and repentant about it, and you get along fine with her.

(C) A beautiful non-virgin woman who’s not ashamed, not repentant about fornicating in the past, and now she wants to settle down and you like her looks even though you don’t much care for her doctrine, even though she has a pleasant enough personality.

Great question! I am an old married guy, so my vote doesn’t really count, but I love the question so much, I had to weigh in.

Do you not know how incredibly BEAUTIFUL a plain, authentic, holiness-seeking, non-makeup wearing, non-slutty dressing, Christian woman, of any age, is?!? She glows from the inside out, and, no, that is NOT due to prenatal vitamins – obviously! :-) It’s the Holy Spirit, or the fruits thereof! This is the jewel of the Garden!

Now, obviously, there must be some physical attraction here, but what I am saying is that what the world rates as attractive is not at all consistent with what I am describing above. So, I rate A first, and B a distant second. Obviously C is not an option for a serious Christian man.

I’m even thinking that if a Godly Christian virgin woman is on the plus side, or the large side, maybe even on the obese side, that they could be legitimate candidates for WK, Tim Tebow, and others. I’ve seen some before-and-after photos with regards to weight-loss systems and they’re really incredible.

My wife is getting a little plump as she ages: and she is all the more beautiful because of it. Plumpness was once regarded as the MOST beautiful external characteristic of women. So, that’s not even close to being a physical deterrent. There is nothing uglier, in my view, than a matchstick movie star.

“Plumpness was once regarded as the MOST beautiful external characteristic of women.”

Really? I had no idea.

My wife is slightly overweight which is understandable after giving birth to two children. She wants to lose weight, but I tell her she’s fine.

To be quite candid, when I was in my 20’s and 30’s a woman’s appearance was rather important to me. A big, chunky backside is not appealing, for example. But physical beauty usually fades for most people. Yet an excellent moral character and an engaging winsome intellectual curiosity and personality persists, so then these things of inner beauty start to come forth over time.

So to WK and other virgin Christian men on this thread who are wondering where to find chaste Christian women, please do consider that they might very well be in the church that you are attending right now!! Take a second look at the women you initially passed by. Watch one of those Friday night movies together that WK touts. If they like the stories and the messages of those old-time movies, and are not put off by black-and-white film, then you might just find a catch!

Even today, in many tribes, if a man has a really skinny wife, he is considered a colossal failure. Big hips, and other things, are still considered to be highly desirable from the standpoint of a woman being able to produce, and successfully nurture and raise, lots of offspring. No one is talking morbidly obese here: much of America is well beyond what we are discussing. But, the typical movie star is way at the other extreme.